Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 1 March 2016, and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 March 2016 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The report before Members outlined the responses received to the formal consultation to introduce Pay and Display Parking Bays and ‘At Any Time’ Waiting Restrictions in Petersfield Avenue, fronting the shopping parade and recommended a further course of action.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by an objector.

The objector commented that Petersfield Avenue had become a rat run for motorists wishing to gain access to the A12. The objector also commented that Stagecoach had been requesting the re-introduction of the previous yellow lines to assist their buses in negotiating the two pedestrian refuges outside the shopping parade. The objector also raised concerns over the loss of parking bays and perceived defects in the public consultation exercise. 

With its agreement Councillors Patricia Rumble and David Johnson addressed the Committee.

Councillor Rumble commented that residents and shopkeepers wanted re-assurances that the proposed scheme was the only scheme suitable for the area and suggested that  the land at the rear of the shops could be considered for additional parking at a later date.

Councillor Johnson commented that he had been advised that shopkeepers had only received the consultation letters a day or so before the committee meeting and had not had time to consider the proposals.

During a brief debate members noted the suggestion that some of the public consultation letters had been received late. Members also discussed the advantages and disadvantages of the traffic islands.

The report recommended that the proposals be recommended to the Cabinet Member for Environment for implementation however it was RESOLVED that consideration of the report be deferred to the next meeting to allow for an extension to the consultation period.

The vote for the resolution to defer the consideration of the report was carried by 8 votes to 1.

Councillor Thompson voted against the resolution.

Councillor Best was absent during part of the presentation of the Item and did not take part in the vote.

The report before Members outlined the responses received to the informal consultation undertaken in the Upminster Ward area of the Upminster Controlled Parking Zone and its periphery and recommended a further course of action.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by an objector with a response given by officers.

The objector commented that the local residents were suffering from parking dis-placement across the ward and that previous schemes implemented had not cured the problem but had just pushed it out to surrounding areas. The objector also commented that greater use of parking permits should be encouraged.

During the debate members agreed that there had been a good response to the initial consultation and discussed the possible introduction of residents parking permits.

Members also discussed the issue of commuter parking and discussed the merits of timed restricted parking in some areas.

Having considered the report and the representations made it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment that;

(a) Area A and Area B as shown on the plans in Appendix 3 be formally consulted for inclusion within a Controlled parking zone;

(b) Area C and D as shown on the plans in Appendix 3 be assessed for the introduction of waiting restrictions at junctions and bends.

Members noted that the estimated cost for the current proposals, as set out in the report, was £70,000 which would be met from the Capital Parking Strategy Investment allocation.

The report before Members outlined the responses received to the advertised proposals to include the residents of Court Gardens and Hall Terrace in to the Harold Wood Controlled Parking Zone (Sector HWE) and recommended a further course of action.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements and with the agreement of the Chairman the Committee was addressed by two objectors with a response given by officers.

The first objector commented that Court Avenue and Davids Drive were being  used by commuters at one end and residents of Court Gardens and Hall Terrace, at the other end, who parked in the roads as they had no parking provision of their own. This led to some residents installing crossovers as they had previously been unable to park near their properties. The objector commented that the roads were not wide but were also being used by vehicles accessing the industrial estate.

The second objector commented that the proposed scheme needed to be reviewed as it would inconvenience all residents. The objector stated that visitors and emergency services often struggled to access the roads. The objector suggested that the only option to solve the issue was for the installation of crossover over the grassed area fronting Court Gardens and Hall Terrace.

During the debate Members discussed whether a previous planning restriction had prevented the roads from previously being included the CPZ and the possibility of adding vehicle crossovers to the grassed area fronting Court Gardens and Hall Terrace.

Officers advised that the verge along the front of the properties was the property of TfL and that TfL would not consider the installation of crossovers off of a road where cars were travelling at significant speeds as it would be unsafe and also cost prohibitive.

Members discussed the possibility of issuing residents parking permits however it was felt that this could set a precedent that would have to be followed elsewhere in the borough. Members also discussed the possibility of providing parking off the service road to the rear of Court Gardens and Hall Terrace. This was discounted owing to the fact that that the land in question was not public highway. 

A number of members voiced their concern over the effect that the proposals would have on the residents of Court Avenue and Davids Drive.

Having considered the report and the representations made, it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment that;

a.      The proposals to include all residents of Court Gardens and Hall Terrace in the Harold Wood Controlled Parking Zone (Sector HWE) (as shown on the plan contained in Appendix A), be implemented as advertised;

b.    the effect of any agreed proposals be monitored.

Members noted that the advertised proposals for the installation of a Disabled Parking Bay along the flank wall of No. 21 Hall Terrace would be dealt with under the Head of StreetCare’s delegated powers of authority in the event that agreement could not be reached with Transport for London on the installation of a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110.

The Committee considered the report noting the representations made and RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment that:

(a)          the proposals to introduce Pay and Display parking bays on the north-western side of Kings Road, fronting St Albans Church operational Monday to Saturday 8.30am to 6.30pm, as shown on the plan (ref: Kings Road TPC 728) Appended to the report as Appendix A, be implemented as advertised; and

(b)          the proposed ‘At Any Time’ waiting restrictions proposed for all eight arms of Princes Road and Kings Road junction, as shown on the plan (ref: Kings Road TPC 728) be implemented as advertised; and

(c)          the effects of any implemented proposals be monitored.

Members noted that the estimated cost of the scheme as set out in the report was £4000, of which £3500 could be funded from the revenue allocation and the remaining £500 would be met from the 2016/17 Minor Parking Schemes budget.

The Committee having considered the report and noting the representations made RESOLVED to recommend to the Cabinet Member for Environment that:

(a)          the proposals to introduce Pay and Display parking bays on the south - eastern side of Helen Road, opposite Ardleigh Green Junior School, operational Monday to Saturday 8.00am to 6.30pm, as shown on the plan (ref: Helen Road TPC776) Appended to the report as Appendix A, be implemented as advertised; and

(b)          the proposed extension of the existing ‘At Any Time’ waiting restrictions in Helen Road as shown on the plan (ref: Helen Road TPC776) be implemented as advertised; and

(c)          the effects of any implemented proposals be monitored.

Members noted that the estimated cost of the scheme as set out in the report was £4000, of which £3500 could be funded from the revenue allocation and the remaining £500 would be met from the 2016/17 Minor Parking Schemes budget.

The Committee is requested to consider the report relating to work in progress and applications - Report attached

The Committee considered a report showing all the new highway scheme requests in order for a decision to be made on whether the scheme should progress or not before resources were expended on detailed design and consultation.

The Committee had considered and agreed in principle the schedule that detailed the applications received by the service.

The Committee’s decisions were noted as against each request and are appended to the minutes.

The Committee is requested to consider the report relating to minor traffic and parking schemes - Report attached

The report before the Committee detailed all Minor Traffic and Parking Scheme application requests in order for a decision to be made on whether the scheme should progress or not before resources were expended on detailed design and consultation.

The Committee had considered and agreed in principle the schedule that detailed the applications received by the service.

The Committee’s decisions were noted as against each request and are appended to the minutes.